[02:44:46] mawatari joins the room [03:36:48] yo.takata joins the room [03:39:13] Yoshiro YONEYA joins the room [03:50:14] Takehito Akagiri joins the room [03:54:32] rhe joins the room [03:59:29] wouter joins the room [04:00:04] Bernie joins the room [04:00:56] marka joins the room [04:01:31] Andrew Sullivan joins the room [04:01:40] Stephen joins the room [04:01:50] wnagele joins the room [04:01:51] Stephen leaves the room [04:02:00] mawatari leaves the room [04:02:06] markkao joins the room [04:02:09] Stephen Morris joins the room [04:02:30] fneves@jabber.registro.br joins the room [04:02:41] fujiwara24 joins the room [04:02:46] roque@hiroshima joins the room [04:02:48] fujiwara24 leaves the room [04:02:57] fujiwara joins the room [04:03:05] should start any minute [04:03:26] orange joins the room [04:03:28] waiting for ppl coming back from lunch [04:03:47] marcos@de joins the room [04:03:59] audio is crisp - compared to other ietfs [04:04:15] scott_rose joins the room [04:04:25] jakob joins the room [04:04:49] kariem joins the room [04:04:53] network provided is also exceptionally good (also a lot of hotels connected) [04:04:56] the audio is indeed pretty good. (Also better than it was on webex, for those curious about the other trial they're doing) [04:05:12] bortzmeyer joins the room [04:05:49] Jelte joins the room [04:06:11] hiya [04:07:10] tachibana@jabber.org joins the room [04:07:13] mellon joins the room [04:07:18] peter and rob starting the session [04:07:18] Lee Howard joins the room [04:07:39] yao joins the room [04:08:39] marcos@de leaves the room [04:08:40] marcos@de joins the room [04:08:57] koji joins the room [04:09:52] ogud: Olafur Gudmundsson joins the room [04:10:00] Sebastian Castro joins the room [04:10:07] Jason Livingood joins the room [04:10:13] John Schnizlein joins the room [04:10:14] is audio streaming working? (question from the chairs) [04:10:25] audio is working [04:10:25] yes, working well [04:10:26] johani joins the room [04:10:36] Suz joins the room [04:10:41] and as far as I can tell there is in fact a delay [04:10:48] Chris Griffiths joins the room [04:10:53] (or was in other sessions) [04:11:24] wouter not in the room so that will be skipped [04:11:36] Wouter, I thought you weren't going to JP? [04:11:41] there is always quite a delay i recall [04:11:56] ray checking for info about the draft [04:12:06] I'm remote [04:12:37] some announcements ... [04:13:00] rob is going to step down as a co-chair of the wg as soon as some replacement can be found because of lacking time [04:13:33] looking for ppl interested ... talking to the charis after session [04:13:55] johani leaves the room [04:14:13] johan ihren going to present draft-morris-dnsop-dnssec-key-timing-01.txt [04:14:13] Vincent Levigneron joins the room [04:14:16] Jaap Akkerhuis joins the room [04:16:15] James Galvin joins the room [04:16:22] larissas joins the room [04:17:54] Ricardo joins the room [04:18:18] pawal joins the room [04:19:10] weiler joins the room [04:20:14] minmin joins the room [04:20:27] double KSK is required for alg roll [04:21:08] norisuke_hirai joins the room [04:21:37] Stephen Morris leaves the room [04:21:50] wes hardaker, sparta at mic [04:22:02] If you are parent and child there is no need of a "KSK". [04:22:06] important to list pros and cons for each of those [04:22:12] number of artifacts for each of them [04:22:20] Stephen Morris joins the room [04:22:46] and then there's the "single-key-zone" option [04:23:04] ed lewis, neustar at mic [04:23:20] using this draft for key mgmt plan atm [04:23:26] Need to clearly describe how to introduce a algorithm and how to remove a algorithm [04:23:38] missing step in zsk rollover [04:23:59] mark: for the mic? [04:24:21] yes just repeat [04:24:21] Andrew Sullivan leaves the room [04:24:28] Andrew Sullivan joins the room [04:25:21] shirai joins the room [04:26:46] Ricardo leaves the room [04:26:56] Ricardo joins the room [04:27:14] Sebastian Castro leaves the room [04:30:08] My reading is that this document is about what you _could_ do, and 4641bis is about what you _should_ do. Therefore I don't think they need to be together [04:30:27] Lee Howard leaves the room [04:30:56] sebastian joins the room [04:31:05] this draft is for tool providers rather than operators [04:31:14] andrew: johan bascially made the same comment [04:31:18] yes [04:31:26] federico: Johan probably referred to implentors of software like OpenDNSSEC or Secure64 [04:31:35] (It was a long-winded +1, I guess :-) ) [04:31:36] or exanames :) [04:31:58] Yes - the OpenDNSSEC key rollover is based on this work, [04:32:11] or very meticulous operators use it [04:32:22] hum [04:32:28] hum [04:32:32] clear hum to make this a wg document [04:32:43] jinmei joins the room [04:32:45] hum [04:33:01] wow. Not much delay here [04:33:11] hum [04:33:14] :') [04:33:15] maybe it was just me typing ;) [04:33:23] it was Peter's timestamp [04:33:25] norisuke_hirai leaves the room: Replaced by new connection [04:33:26] norisuke_hirai joins the room [04:33:26] whoa now [04:33:28] i try to minimize the impact for you guys :) [04:33:36] ah ok ;) [04:33:38] and we are forever in your debt [04:33:52] I'll provide the beverage of choice in Anaheim I guess [04:34:02] johani joins the room [04:34:16] looking forward ... hope the wedding went/is going well [04:34:29] liman joins the room [04:34:34] This weekend [04:35:48] (These slides are not on the materials page, I take it?) [04:36:03] it's there [04:36:04] oh, wait [04:36:05] never mind [04:36:05] reload [04:37:52] just detact and set tc [04:37:58] detect [04:38:09] Yes, it will hurt the root name servers‚ and I'm not happy about that. Unnecessary queries to the roots is something that documents need to try to supress. [04:38:43] only if you don't do EDNS in the query [04:38:53] norisuke_hirai leaves the room: Replaced by new connection [04:38:54] norisuke_hirai joins the room [04:39:03] if you want me to read something please write specifically what i should read out ... [04:39:11] named already has special code to handle priming queries [04:39:21] will do [04:40:08] same for me priming has code. [04:40:17] Liman: how about having the NS set not be root servers ? then folloup priming queries will go to the different set of servers (the root servers can still be authorative) [04:40:18] ? [04:40:42] weiler leaves the room [04:41:00] weiler joins the room [04:41:12] feedback asked ... [04:41:43] Bernie leaves the room [04:42:08] Bernie joins the room [04:42:11] weiler leaves the room [04:42:18] weiler joins the room [04:42:57] norisuke_hirai leaves the room [04:43:04] norisuke_hirai joins the room [04:43:35] That was fast [04:43:49] Fredrik Ljunggren: draft-ljunggren-dps-framework-01.txt, http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/dnsop-1.pdf [04:44:13] ogud: It doesn't really matter. The problem is that you want to limit the number of questions that hit the servers at the top of the tree - be that actual roots or "fake ones". It is much easier to scale the provisioning side further down the tree. [04:44:18] Incorporated lots of comments from lots of people. (trust history) [04:46:37] SUNGUONIAN joins the room [04:47:17] Lee Howard joins the room [04:48:34] Chris Griffiths leaves the room [04:48:45] Chris Griffiths joins the room [04:49:08] acbegen joins the room [04:50:13] aalain joins the room [04:51:55] doug.mtview joins the room [04:52:09] billvs joins the room [04:52:19] I have read, I support adoption, and I will review [04:52:26] (in case they're collecting) [04:52:49] acbegen leaves the room [04:53:34] yes [04:53:46] policy ood [04:53:57] good [04:54:37] agree w/ matt [04:56:54] andrew: you were named for reviewing this amongst ~5-10 others ... so you are comitted now [04:56:56] ;) [04:57:07] yeah, I heard it :_ [04:57:14] ok [04:57:17] thanks [04:57:21] on my TODO [04:57:23] so the sound is indeed very crisp [04:58:05] it's really very good. Much better than many in the past [04:58:10] ack [04:58:34] marcos@de leaves the room [04:59:44] raise [04:59:52] rob: documented adopted [04:59:56] -d [05:00:52] Erik Kline joins the room [05:05:09] There's not even going to be consensus about the Security Considerations section. I am sympathetic to the aims of the draft, but I can't believe we're going to get any consensus on this issue this time around given the last stupid bunfights [05:05:19] (that can be for the mic. I've read it) [05:05:20] for the mic? [05:05:37] read [05:06:13] ray joins the room [05:06:32] BTW, what happened on the reverse mapping draft? [05:06:54] zhanglikun joins the room [05:06:57] it was WGLC, it went nowhere [05:07:29] still waiting for chairs to make an excutive decission to forward or kill [05:07:55] Oh, heaven, no. The patient is dead and rotting. Put it in the ground [05:08:37] By the time we were done, all the draft said was "you might want to do reverse mapping, or not. And maybe it'll be useful, or might not be." And yet people still objected [05:08:54] mic: agree w/ ted [05:09:10] haha [05:09:16] hehehe [05:09:18] why does this sound so familiar? [05:09:37] it's probably just your imagination... :') [05:09:46] Ricardo leaves the room [05:09:55] Operators were never required to do reverse mapping, of course. What Peter's saying [05:09:57] this is not the WG you attended last year... [05:09:58] Ricardo joins the room [05:10:01] touch joins the room [05:10:17] Yet for some reason even the IETF populates the reverse tree with garbage. [05:10:23] mic: th customers will decide [05:10:36] mic's closed already [05:10:59] hard w/ 30 sec delay [05:11:05] but ok [05:11:17] they're running this really fast. [05:11:17] sorry [05:11:28] marcos@de joins the room [05:12:05] better [05:13:25] comments? [05:14:09] sound reasonable [05:17:02] Peter is quite right that the sentence in 1123 sure looks like a policy that has been promoted to a part of the protocol. [05:17:26] mic? [05:17:30] Naw [05:17:34] thanks :) [05:17:45] The BNF in the draft is also broken [05:18:04] touch leaves the room [05:19:20] wnagele: for the mic: we can do this as a "quick fix", and then start the real work to fix 1123, to relax rules further. [05:19:28] if needed [05:21:16] larissas leaves the room [05:23:17] volume [05:23:35] to low? [05:23:48] should be fixed now ... [05:24:53] tachibana@jabber.org leaves the room [05:25:26] Ricardo leaves the room [05:27:26] I fail completely to see how "not bad" and "danger" are different in any important way. [05:27:58] The registrant is not the relevant category here. It's not as though we've never seen bad behaviour inside a bank, for instance [05:28:08] the possibility of these things occurring is bad. the outcome is mostly harmless in the "not bad" case. [05:28:21] nonsense. It's mostly harmless most of the time [05:28:27] eh? [05:28:55] Suppose my bank screws up and sends me to the wrong IP with one of these, because they failed to keep one of them in sync [05:29:05] if I can successfully prove that I am bankofamerica.COM , and that's different from bankofamerica.com , that's bad. [05:29:20] @ajs - I don't agree. If the two names mean _exactly_ the same but only differ in the character set (equivalent to the input locale) then having them resolve to different entities is horrible [05:29:22] roque@hiroshima leaves the room [05:29:31] yeah, but the case-sensitivity is a total red herring [05:29:39] the simplified chinese vs. traditional chinese case is similar, and the potential for lossage is substantial. [05:30:07] they don't "mean exactly the same". This is much closer to color/colour than a/A, although neither is a perfect analogue [05:30:18] we have to fess up that we don't have an answer for this [05:30:36] that's my fundamental objection to the draft: it's peddling the notion that we can solve this [05:30:38] I don't disagree with that. But this is a real problem. [05:30:39] andrew that is not true, for ppl on the street they are equal so if you say go to andrew.china by speaking of it they might understand one or the other [05:30:46] I wonder where the "guarantee" language came from [05:31:00] why aren't they exactly the same? They're different ideograms with (AFAIK) exactly the same meaning [05:31:06] @mellon: fully ack [05:31:11] Another broken analogy (all analogies are broken): usabank.example vs. usa-bank.example. We allow them to go to different registrants. [05:31:26] "color" and "colour" are different spellings of "exactly the same meaning" [05:31:32] And they are "the same". [05:31:34] yup, and that's a big problem. [05:31:48] it's a big user interface problem [05:32:01] ultimately you'd have to say that the only safe way to talk to your bank online is with a pre-shared identity [05:32:04] it's a problem for which we have no technical solution [05:32:06] stephane ... you think that the current brokenness of the system justifies to go forward the same way? [05:32:16] For color vs. colour, a possible solution is to withdraw the Declaration of Independance and to go back to the real orthography [05:32:16] (I am not, note, saying there is no problem here. There are huge problems.) [05:32:27] pawal leaves the room [05:32:30] i agree that it is not necessarily a problem on the technical level [05:32:33] wouter leaves the room [05:32:39] pawal joins the room [05:32:39] wouter joins the room [05:32:44] but on the level of tld's you can prevent a lot of it's impact [05:32:47] Wolfgang: I do not find the current system broken. It is the state of the world, not our creation. [05:32:50] Indeed, we should all spell it "couleur". [05:33:01] whereas further down the tree given the current business situation it gets much harder up to impossible [05:33:27] My objection to the draft is basically that it suggests plain delegations via NS will work [05:33:40] how about ensuring that only one variant is being considered as a idn tld? [05:33:56] and I contend that this simply lies about what we're doing. If we think there are variants, then we need to provide something with a much stronger link [05:33:59] that's what ICANN has done [05:34:03] Wolfgang: we do not do it for .COM vs. .CM [05:34:06] "no variants" for now [05:34:24] stephane: agreed [05:34:30] with all it's nasty implications [05:34:31] for who use english, color is not same as colour, but a is same as A, for chinese, U+56fd == U+570b, just like a == A ,when them use in name/domain name. [05:35:02] umz, hasn't this been discussed (over and over and over and over again) for idna-bis in general? [05:35:09] "for who use english, color is not same as colour, but a is same as A," [05:35:16] this is actually false in both directions [05:35:25] Sunguonian: I disagree. It is not possible, most of the times, in language issues, to say that two things are "the same" or not. It is never black or white. [05:35:29] in any case, if .CN wants to treat the two names as equivalent that's _their_ prerogative, we just need to help provide the right technical solution (if possible) [05:35:54] bortzmeyer leaves the room [05:36:04] Canadians regularly conflate the two spellings of colour, and a/A is importantly different depending on context. [05:36:09] Bernie leaves the room [05:36:25] umz2; sounds like dname was made for this (and if not, what is dname for?) [05:36:31] liman leaves the room [05:36:32] another solution is to change the spelling of the language. [05:36:43] I like it! [05:36:54] that was the American solution, which is why Webster spelled it "color" [05:37:05] not a joke, there have been several dutch spelling changes [05:37:15] Breaking News: IETF re-standardizes English. [05:37:22] and what about the poor users of eszett? [05:38:13] abelyang joins the room [05:38:45] pawal leaves the room [05:38:55] I read it [05:38:57] pawal joins the room [05:39:08] bortzmeyer joins the room [05:39:12] I do think it's interesting [05:39:42] I doubt very much it should be addressed in DNSOP [05:40:26] I'm going to miss having Rob as chair.... [05:40:28] Bernie joins the room [05:40:36] yeah [05:40:56] I can't image that if A.com and a.com be resolved to different IP. [05:41:06] Jason Livingood leaves the room [05:41:11] that's just because the protocol makes them the same [05:41:17] that was an accident, historically [05:41:27] And some people want to change that [05:41:30] and one that has had some nasty side effects [05:41:43] What Stephane just said [05:42:10] Also, in French, Poussin (the painter) is not the same as poussin (the small chicken) [05:42:17] Jason Livingood joins the room [05:42:18] wilmer joins the room [05:43:21] in dutch, holland (hollow land) and Holland (the nation) ... but spelling mandates it to be called the Netherlands. [05:43:36] but Poussin (the painter) is also not the same as Poussin (his father) [05:43:51] IMO, it could make big confuse if let TC and SC point to different IP. [05:43:55] sebastian leaves the room [05:44:21] Re Bortzmeyer: "two zones behave the same". All the slides talked about one domain and its variant. But the interesting point which is not addressed is what to do if you have a huge (as in "exponential") number of variants which have to behave the same. [05:44:25] too many things intermixed here ... imho [05:44:25] time for context-sensitive dns? [05:44:34] sebastian joins the room [05:44:36] dwim? [05:45:12] Jason Livingood leaves the room [05:45:34] i don't see how tlds are special here, and the whole discussion reminds me a lot of almost every discussion in the idna wg [05:45:49] Jason Livingood joins the room [05:46:03] I like the analogy of "foobar.org " versus "foo-bar.org ". [05:46:08] I think that's clarifying. [05:46:09] @jetle: same here [05:46:14] The answer is, you buy both. [05:47:39] Also buy f-oobar.org and fooba-r?org (speaking with my registry hat) [05:47:44] The problem is partly that everyone has intuitions about what is "just obvious" about how various bits of language work. It turns out that almost all those naive intuitions are completely wrong, and that actually the whole phaenomenon of language is incredibly complicated (not to mention astonishing) [05:48:13] aka the unicode delusion [05:48:35] stephane, no, because those aren't mistakes people would ever make. [05:48:37] teaching machines to do it in any way not obviously wrong to competent speakers means you're going to build a machine that'll pass the Turing test [05:48:46] sweet! [05:49:04] passing the turing test isn't enough btw [05:49:17] the analogy of "foobar.org " versus "foo-bar.org is not similar to the chinese variants [05:49:18] it also depends on location and perhaps even intention of the user [05:49:23] also, of course, people want this to happen in a bog-simple protocol designed years ago for a primitive and unilingual environment [05:49:25] jelte: ack [05:49:27] Yes, many humans will fail the Turing test, even in their native language :-) [05:49:29] just wait, you come up with an ai that does this, and it'll start registering rogue domains to pay for its electricity. [05:49:36] without breaking everyone's deployed machines [05:49:41] heh [05:50:09] .com VS COM may be the analogy of chinese variants [05:50:17] foobar versus foo-bar isn't the same thing, no, but it *is* the same situation. [05:50:25] It's a really poor analogy [05:50:28] you have two names that might be considered equivalent, and you have to do something about it. [05:50:30] com vs. COM, I mean [05:50:45] there's no way to avoid them being considered equivalent [05:50:50] the case sensitivity example is just completely irrelevant, because the protocol has rules about those [05:50:59] we need to put context into dns then :) [05:50:59] they're the same except that the case is preserved [05:51:25] if the rule had been "DNS is lower case", live would have been easier [05:51:37] wolf: (02:44:54 PM) Jelte: time for context-sensitive dns? [05:51:38] :0 [05:51:39] jakob leaves the room [05:51:47] s/0/\)/ [05:51:49] oh ... sorry missed that [05:52:02] I have read [05:52:06] I think we ought to adopt it [05:52:10] it's a sweet piece of work [05:52:57] pawal leaves the room [05:53:03] nice work Ray [05:53:09] oh i didn't mean that, more like "same minds ..." [05:53:10] pawal joins the room [05:53:14] COM vs com is not a good analogy [05:53:30] chinese variant is a problem which can not be easily understood by the people who has not knowledge of chinese [05:53:40] oh please [05:53:43] Because the protocol itself deals with the exponentiality of the problem: "COM", "COm", "CoM", "Com", etc. all match "com" [05:53:44] Thanks Jason :) [05:53:44] Edward Lewis has the chinese knowledge [05:54:14] yao: strongly disagrees. The CHinese issue is just one among many cases where the language rules are too complicated for programs. [05:54:15] I think that Edward Lewis can understand this problem better [05:54:55] The IETF is an internaional organization. If a problem cannot be understood by people all over the world, then this problem does not belong in the IETF. [05:54:56] I don't think anyone is claiming there is not a problem here [05:55:13] bortzmeyer: I see [05:55:15] andrew, that's correct. I'm certainly not claiming that. [05:55:58] Andrew summarizes it nicely: The problem is partly that everyone has intuitions about what is "just obvious" about how various bits of language work. It turns out that almost all those naive intuitions are completely wrong, and that actually the whole phaenomenon of language is incredibly complicated (not to mention astonishing) [05:56:00] audio has gone [05:56:09] I try to make this problem easily understood [05:56:13] me too, audio gone [05:56:33] no connection to icecast.ietf76.jp, new connection pending ... [05:56:35] did it drop in the middle of Joe's talk, or when he started? [05:56:43] at slide 1 [05:56:55] (1) the problem can't be easily understood and (2) if it could be, using the analogy of case sensitivity would not be the way to illustrate it, I'm sorry to say [05:57:03] billvs leaves the room [05:57:59] middle [05:58:19] I think there are issues that touch on the DNS here [05:58:22] ack with andrew [05:58:29] pawal leaves the room [05:58:31] the analogy with case is wrong (even in your example yao) [05:58:50] I agree with Ed's position on variants - like I said earlier, it's not for us to judge on the policy of variants. If CN.NIC want this policy, that's up to them. Our job is to help them implement it [05:58:58] I agree with Ed's suggestion that perhaps a survey of what DNS issues there are in keeping zones "the same" will help [05:59:04] Erik Kline leaves the room [05:59:22] bortzmeyer: WRong for "If a problem cannot be understood by people all over the world, then this problem does not belong in the IETF." " IETF does not understand the problem " does not mean that this problem should not be solved by IETF. just say, IETF should understand the problem first before solve the problem [05:59:41] but as a matter of fact, we have to get the message out that there is _no_ way in the DNS today to make sure that two delegations are the same. [06:00:11] what makes this discussion different than the one in idnabis? [06:00:42] in IDNABIS the answer was "Kick it over to the DNS people." We don't have anyone to kick to :P [06:00:42] scott_rose leaves the room [06:00:57] ietf is trying to solve the problem. if there is no problem, ietf will disappear [06:01:05] aha [06:01:05] mellon leaves the room [06:01:40] Given that it's after 01:00 now, may I infer the meeting is over? [06:01:45] Bernie leaves the room [06:01:54] not over yet [06:01:55] meeting is still on [06:01:57] not quite [06:01:58] Well, in the heat of the discussion, nobody trolled about local.arpa :-) [06:02:05] (Audio's been dead since Joe started talking) [06:02:09] stephane: true true [06:02:14] Yippee! [06:02:16] That's the good thing with IDN: it makes every other problem seem simple [06:02:28] Lee Howard leaves the room [06:02:30] re local.arpa: LOL [06:02:31] would a solution be to not use idn? :P [06:02:56] Jelte: remind me, dutch does not use non-ASCII characters, right? :-} [06:03:08] it does ... grrrrr [06:03:20] that's for dutch speakers and the kind :) [06:03:52] rhe leaves the room [06:03:54] first real use of dnssec after openssh using it for SSHFP being shown now :) [06:03:54] rhe joins the room [06:03:59] http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/dnsop-6.pdf [06:04:16] yes: but so little that most of us don't care about it :p [06:04:23] rhe leaves the room [06:04:24] I thought SPARTA did this once before? [06:04:34] Jason Livingood leaves the room [06:04:44] nlnet labs had one as well [06:04:46] needed quite some more work from my point [06:04:50] both of them [06:04:55] yes [06:05:09] jinmei leaves the room [06:05:12] and if i recall correct the sparta needed to be patched into the firefox code [06:05:15] minmin leaves the room [06:05:17] not really workable [06:05:19] weiler leaves the room [06:05:21] doug.mtview leaves the room [06:05:21] johani leaves the room [06:05:22] abelyang leaves the room [06:05:23] Suz leaves the room [06:05:24] ok closed the session now [06:05:27] Stephen Morris leaves the room [06:05:30] see you in anaheim! [06:05:30] ray leaves the room [06:05:30] Yoshiro YONEYA leaves the room [06:05:32] what, you don't rebuild from source every day? [06:05:33] ;-) [06:05:34] bortzmeyer leaves the room [06:05:35] markkao leaves the room [06:05:40] :) [06:05:44] bye all. See you in Anaheim. [06:05:45] bye andrew ... have fun at the wedding [06:05:49] James Galvin leaves the room [06:05:50] Well, I hope. Thanks [06:05:50] wnagele leaves the room [06:05:56] one of the problems was (i wrote the labs one) is that you don't get access to the resolving process [06:06:00] so you can only guess [06:06:02] ow [06:06:07] yao leaves the room [06:06:09] orange leaves the room [06:06:11] wouter leaves the room [06:06:21] Ok, I'm going to bed. Nighty night, all [06:06:23] Jelte leaves the room [06:06:29] koji leaves the room [06:06:29] Andrew Sullivan leaves the room [06:06:33] John Schnizlein leaves the room [06:06:42] Jaap Akkerhuis leaves the room [06:07:01] shirai leaves the room [06:07:13] kariem leaves the room [06:07:34] marka leaves the room [06:07:50] aalain leaves the room [06:07:59] fneves@jabber.registro.br leaves the room [06:09:15] yo.takata leaves the room [06:10:12] Chris Griffiths leaves the room [06:10:25] sebastian leaves the room [06:12:00] Stephen Morris joins the room [06:12:42] bortzmeyer joins the room [06:13:07] jinmei joins the room [06:14:36] marcos@de leaves the room [06:15:07] jinmei leaves the room [06:15:41] Stephen Morris leaves the room [06:22:59] Vincent Levigneron leaves the room [06:24:21] Takehito Akagiri leaves the room [06:24:24] norisuke_hirai leaves the room [06:24:52] ogud: Olafur Gudmundsson leaves the room [06:36:40] roque@hiroshima joins the room [06:37:16] roque@hiroshima leaves the room [06:53:26] SUNGUONIAN leaves the room [07:02:17] fujiwara leaves the room [07:08:05] Stephen Morris joins the room [07:12:27] bortzmeyer leaves the room [07:13:48] Stephen Morris leaves the room [07:14:24] zhanglikun leaves the room: Replaced by new connection. [07:39:15] James Galvin joins the room [07:41:06] Stephen Morris joins the room [07:44:37] James Galvin leaves the room [07:46:56] sebastian joins the room [07:57:53] sebastian leaves the room [08:04:03] bortzmeyer joins the room [08:05:34] bortzmeyer leaves the room [08:43:53] Jaap Akkerhuis joins the room [08:47:02] Jaap Akkerhuis leaves the room [08:50:31] Stephen Morris leaves the room [08:55:51] Stephen Morris joins the room [08:56:00] Vincent Levigneron joins the room [08:56:41] Vincent Levigneron leaves the room [09:52:09] Stephen Morris leaves the room [09:57:29] Stephen Morris joins the room [10:03:15] sebastian joins the room [10:05:22] Stephen Morris leaves the room [10:05:46] sebastian leaves the room [10:06:18] sebastian joins the room [10:06:44] sebastian leaves the room [10:08:45] Stephen Morris joins the room [10:09:42] Stephen Morris leaves the room [10:15:29] sebastian joins the room [10:54:53] sebastian leaves the room [12:47:06] danny joins the room [12:57:11] johani joins the room [13:09:11] johani leaves the room [14:17:17] sebastian joins the room [14:30:48] danny leaves the room [14:30:48] wilmer leaves the room [14:57:08] Stephen Morris joins the room [15:49:17] Stephen Morris leaves the room [15:50:11] sebastian leaves the room